Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google endorses the Trans-Pacific Partnership

publicpolicy.googleblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 260 posts

Re: Google endorses the Trans-Pacific Partnership

#41

Post by PeCaN »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #26
_blz2 wrote: post #23

What are some alternatives to google search. I think I can get away from the rest of their products in the coming few months.

DuckDuckGo is pretty fantastic all around. Bing is alright, to be honest (some of their data widgets are more comprehensive than Google's), but you will find times with Bing that you are sad with the results.

If anyone isn't sold on DuckDuckGo: using quotes for literal queries actually does something, instead of Google deciding that's not actually what you meant.

That's the killer feature for me: it actually obeys "advanced search" operators.

Re: Google endorses the Trans-Pacific Partnership

#42

Post by imaginenore »

davb wrote: post #21

This endorsement surprises me just because the TPP is so blatantly anti-consumer, pro-corporation. I'm under no illusion that Google's anything other massive tech-savvy advertising company, but the self-serving corporate side of the company is usually hidden behind the pretty veneer of "tech for the people". Supporting a trade agreement like the TPP (especially given the lack of transparency in the process) lacks the…

Well, they removed "Don't be evil" as their motto, replaced it with "Do the right thing", which clearly means "make more moneys". They became yet another big corporation.

Re: Google endorses the Trans-Pacific Partnership

#43

Post by syoc »

I see that the point about countries not being allowed to require local storage because

>These provisions will support the Internet’s open architecture and make it more difficult for TPP countries to block Internet sites -- so that users have access to a web that is global, not just local.

I do however believe that there is a aspect that has been overlooked here. Many cooperations, private and governmentally controlled, handle sensitive data. Having a SLA with Microsoft, Amazon or Google that states that this highly sensitive data is ONLY to be stored in specific data centers is the only way for a lot of non flexible IT departments to regain some control over their data. This is a widely popular demand. I can only see this as the "X eyes" with USA in charge removing one more hurdle in their way to total information control.

Re: Google endorses the Trans-Pacific Partnership

#44

Post by sounds »

forrestthewoods wrote: post #39
davb wrote: post #21

This endorsement surprises me just because the TPP is so blatantly anti-consumer, pro-corporation. I'm under no illusion that Google's anything other massive tech-savvy advertising company, but the self-serving corporate side of the company is usually hidden behind the pretty veneer of "tech for the people". Supporting a trade agreement like the TPP (especially given the lack of transparency in the process) lacks the…

Is it anti-consumer? Convince me. I'm open. But I also want you to include counter-arguments. I want to hear both sides to reach a conclusion. So far most anti-TPP arguments I've read are high on rhetoric and low on substance.

How about anti-national-sovereignty? The secret drafts and the extra-legal processes weaken national sovereignty.

I think a strong nation is good for consumers, and a weak nation destroys the consumer base.

Re: Google endorses the Trans-Pacific Partnership

#47

Post by fraserharris »

syoc wrote: post #43

I see that the point about countries not being allowed to require local storage because >These provisions will support the Internet’s open architecture and make it more difficult for TPP countries to block Internet sites -- so that users have access to a web that is global, not just local. I do however believe that there is a aspect that has been overlooked here. Many cooperations, private and governmentally controll…

TPP binds governments from requiring local data storage, not private contracts.

Re: Google endorses the Trans-Pacific Partnership

#48

Post by josho »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #32
lucb1e wrote: post #4

> prohibits [participating countries] from requiring local storage of data > It prohibits discrimination against foreign Internet services As a Dutchman I can see why Google likes this.

Of the very many terrible things in these trade treaties (most notably the massive expansions of copyright and patents), this is one of the few that seems helpful. It's a step towards not having to care (as much) about national borders on the Internet. A company providing a service accessible to the entire Internet should not have to worry about jurisdictions other than their own.

To offer an alternative viewpoint.

In Canada we have laws that protect personal health data. For instance my doctor cannot save my patient data outside of the country. This is a major pain for SAAS vendors, and I understand google's position. However, as a patient I appreciate knowing that my personal health data is not being sent around the world to other jurisdictions that may not have the same privacy and data protection laws that we do here.

So, I have to wonder do we have a problem of countries requiring local storage for reasons that are questionable? Or is this simply a preemptive strike ensuring companies like google continue their easy access to global markets? Given my example above I suggest its the latter.

Re: Google endorses the Trans-Pacific Partnership

#50

Post by MrZongle2 »

Eleopteryx wrote: post #38
anonbanker wrote: post #35

if Trump wins, there will be no TPP, at least if he sticks to his campaign promises. We all accidentally get a gift if he makes it to the Oval Office.

According to https://ballotpedia.org/2016_presidential_candidates_on_the_... all of the remaining candidates oppose the TPP.

At the moment.

Senator Obama opposed quite a few things as well.

Post reply on HN